Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It seems to me that balancing by points cost actually goes against the entire nature of the new rules. It's advantage is that it is familiar and can be quite granular as well as more flexible than the option I am proposing in list building. You can have 10 guys in the unit or 11 or 13.

However, the option I am proposing would be leagues easier for casual play, and may even add an interesting list bidding/counterpicking to tournament play.

Instead of balancing by a seperate points system, balance by the scrolls themselves. Make the units a set number of choices, the monsters and special characters and some heroes may be more than one scroll and some of the warmachines and lesser heroes could be 2-3 choices per scroll. Chaos Warriors might be 10 per scroll while Halbediers might be 20 and Goblins 40. Those are all just numbers being thrown out to illustrate the idea.

This would all you to just play a game of X scrolls. For tournaments you would probably restrict by the four alignments or if you wanted to be more traditional you could do by the faction. You would alternate deploying scrolls and go from there. Seems to me like it would add a lot of fun strategy to tournament play and be very easy to use for casual play.

The trick of it is figuring out the scrolls and balancing them. I would like to try and set up general categories for comparison with each other to help balance things out. Things like non-character Hero, light infantry, standard infantry, heavy infantry, monstrous infantry, cavalry, etc Probably separating ranged vs non-ranged. Minor imbalances are fine and actually a good thing. Maybe Chaos has above average heavy infantry, while Wood Elves have above average ranged infantry for example. Dwarves Warmachines may be better, etc etc.

Am I barking up the wrong tree? I haven't played Fantasy in over a decade but AoS highly interests me. What are people's thoughts? Do you think this is something that could work? It would allow consideration of special rules, different weapon options and so forth. I don't think the generic heroes actually need different costs for being mounted or unmounted - being mounted makes it far, far easier to see them and focus fire on them for example, so there is an inherent balancing factor there. Most of the weapon options seems similar, with very few being outright better - and even those generally being within the bounds of it being fine imbalance. Some units may just be better with shields and spears, others with two hand weapons or what have you. I also like the way it allows for the really out there scenarios - like playing a handful of heroes against an enemy army or the all flying or all cavalry lists without any extra formation rules needed.

Oh wow, just realized this thread is all about this idea. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/654696.page

Seems like people started moving away from it though. I think it should still work out a lot better so I am going to continue to work on it.